Nanny State —

Australia gains its first ever ‘adult’ game

Australia is finally getting its hands on an "adult" rated game, as Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge becomes the first game to receive the country's newly introduced R18+ rating

The Australian Classification Board has received years of criticism for banning those games that contained adult content inappropriate for its MA15+ rating. While the tight controls were laudable for ensuring that young gamers weren't subjected to games too violent for their age, the lack of an "adult" category resulted in mature gamers missing out on the original content of a host of games, including Grand Theft Auto III in 2001 and Mortal Kombat in 2011.

Those developers whose games were refused an MA15+ rating but still wanted to see their games arrive on Australian shores were previously forced to go through the arduous process of censoring and modifying their games for the Australian Classification Board.

After years of lobbying by groups such as the Interactive Games and Entertainment Association, the Australian government passed a bill in June 2012 modifying its classification rules to allow those games aimed at gamers over the age of 15 to be released without additional modifications. Other games in the Grand Theft Auto series and Fall Out 3 had to censor their versions after they were refused classification in their original forms.

When the original version of Ninja Gaiden 3was released in Australia in January 2012, it received an MA15+ rating for modified content judged to contain "strong bloody violence". The Razor's Edge edition, released for Nintendo's Wii U, contains additional material that warrants the country's first ever 18+ rating.

In a government press release, director of the Australian Classification Board Lesley O'Brien said, "Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge contains violence that is high in impact because of its frequency, high definition graphics, and emphasis on blood effects."

While mature Australian gamers will be glad to see the new rating come into effect, the party with the greatest cause for joy is most probably Razor's Edge's creators Tecmo Koei Games, whose game is likely to receive a large amount of free press resulting from the rating.

As an Australian that has also traveled overseas, I was first personally exposed to the realisation of Australian censorship when I got to watch TV in other countries and was able to then compare movie to movie.

This is a step on hopefully a road that takes this country to a more free/tolerant society. I mean seriously, censoring the word "shit" or "fuck"? As if kids in schools haven't been exposed to that and far more by the age of 10.

Note: This is reference to the self-censorship that occurs in Australia, not governmental.

Also this R18+ rating was long overdue and delayed by one wowser attorney general in one state - his attitude was akin to banning steak for adults because babies can't chew it. Glad to see sanity prevail.

"Fall Out 3"? It's just one word; a "fallout" in this context refers to the devastating effects of nuclear war.

That particular game, I know was censored in Japan. One of the first quests gives you the option to detonate or disable an atomic bomb. Due to cultural sensitivity in Japan, the option to detonate the atomic bomb was removed. I wouldn't say that's silly, but it's absurd that they took that out, and, if I recall correctly, they left in the option to sell the Capital Wasteland's youngest child to sex slavers, but then again, the option to do that is not presented as directly (many players may not even be aware that you could do this, but collectors do, as it's the only way to get a unique mask (without cheating). I blew up Megaton once (and felt really bad) but I have never earned that mask.

As an Australian that has also traveled overseas, I was first personally exposed to the realisation of the immensity of Australian censorship when I got to watch TV in other countries and was able to then compare movie to movie.

This is a step on hopefully a road that takes this country to a more free society. I mean seriously, censoring the word "shit" or "fuck"? As if kids in schools haven't been exposed to that and far more by the age of 10.

This makes no sense to me at all, are you sure you're from the same country as me? We get all kinds of language, and nudity, on ABC or SBS after the late, late hour of 6:30pm. I've travelled too - you don't get that on US television unless you are paying for "adult" cable. On JJJ we're hearing the uncensored version of Thrift Shop, the version played on US mainstream radio is missing half the words! That's a gratuitous example - you also don't get one-off words like "whore" in songs on radio (used properly, in context: Everlast, "What It's Like") and you get mass hysteria when Janet Jackson "accidentally" shows a wrinkly old nipple. You want prudish idiocy, don't look at Australian media.

Also don't equate a commercial TV station's self-censorship - which is more likely to be self-trimming to fit in more advertisements or fit content to a major advertiser's imagined likes and dislikes - to state-mandated censorship. Channel 10 may have cut content from certain Simpsons episodes but nobody from the government made them.

The fact we had no 18+ category for games was due to one holdout state Attorney General in South Australia and a general lag of legislation behind technology, not any general feeling of discomfort with such things.

A significant proportion of Australians, myself included, take advantage of websites like http://www.steamprices.com/ to see how badly we're being taken to the cleaners and then ask overseas friends to 'gift' a cheaper foreign copy to us. E.g. CoD is $90AUD in Australia at the moment, or $20AUD in USA. 9 times out of 10 it is at least $20, if not $40, cheaper for us to get a game from overseas, censored or not. Even with our dollar at 1:1 parity with the US dollar. :|

But yes. In a scene reminiscent of The Incredibles, in which Mr. Incredible tells an old lady specifically which forms she should *definitely not* use in order to successfully navigate the insurance claims bureaucracy and process her claim, Valve did publicly inform Australians that if they're gifted a copy of a game by an overseas friend, they will receive that overseas friend's domestic version rather than the Australian version. Nudge nudge, wink wink.

Some folks physically import the media (particularly for Xbox games where a physical disc is required), but that runs the risk of Customs intercepting the media. Refused Classification materials are legal to possess and play (so long as you don't expose others to it), but not legal to import or sell. The only exception to this is in Western Australia where in 2007 the government implemented legislation which makes it illegal to possess Refused Classification videogames, e.g. the overseas copy of L4D2.

I'm glad we (Australians) finally have an R18+ rating for games. Not so much for the censorship the lack of an R18+ rating created, as the censorship was relatively easy to sidestep thanks to digital distribution and the like.

No, what bugged me most was that more often than not, games rated in a similar category overseas, e.g. NC17 and other 18+ ratings, would be shoehorned down into the MA15+ rating because the Classification Board decided that it would kind-of-sort-of just barely fit.

Games like Fallout 3, which contained drug addiction, child slavery, massive amounts of gore, severed limbs and more. Rated 18+ everywhere except Australia. Dragon Age, also, was downgraded to MA15+ when all overseas classifications placed it in the 18+ category. I'm certain there are other good examples I am forgetting.

I always thought Aussies are drunken foul-mouthed yobs and their men are just as bad (old joke). Perhaps the Aussies I've encountered away from their home were revelling in the freedom from a repressive regime.

Joking aside could any Australian readers shed light on what caused such a restrictive set of censorship laws to come into place originally?

This makes no sense to me at all, are you sure you're from the same country as me? We get all kinds of language, and nudity, on ABC or SBS after the late, late hour of 6:30pm. I've travelled too - you don't get that on US television unless you are paying for "adult" cable. On JJJ we're hearing the uncensored version of Thrift Shop, the version played on US mainstream radio is missing half the words! That's a gratuitous example - you also don't get one-off words like "whore" in songs on radio (used properly, in context: Everlast, "What It's Like") and you get mass hysteria when Janet Jackson "accidentally" shows a wrinkly old nipple. You want prudish idiocy, don't look at Australian media.

Also don't equate a commercial TV station's self-censorship - which is more likely to be self-trimming to fit in more advertisements or fit content to a major advertiser's imagined likes and dislikes - to state-mandated censorship. Channel 10 may have cut content from certain Simpsons episodes but nobody from the government made them.

The fact we had no 18+ category for games was due to one holdout state Attorney General in South Australia and a general lag of legislation behind technology, not any general feeling of discomfort with such things.

lol yeah, pretty sure there's only 1 large continent/country/island sitting in the southern hemisphere with a red-head for a prime minister.

In one case, the move Die Hard when watched in the UK is entirely different to what you get in Australia. Yes, I'm fully aware this has nothing to do with state-sponsored censorship (I never said it was) and is just a commercial decision to get an earlier time slot and thus more exposure for their ads. But that's the point. It's still censorship deemed necessary by the networks because of the fear that the 'masses' will get all riled up and complain to the local ombudsman because Bruce Willis said a naughty word.

They're 2 different things but that doesn't mean they can't be related. The article attributes state laws (which as you point out, is a whole 'nother level of censorship), my example is however still reflective of the 'PC' culture we have here that has ultimately amounted to the same end result.

But as mentioned, the difference is that we're apparently censoring ourselves rather than it being imposed by some authoritarian regime.

And yes I agree, countries like the U.S. do it far more than we do. I blame ignorant parents

Of course it is. We just had to wait for the previous SA Attorney General, Michael Atkinson, to resign, as he had been holding up the process for the best part of a decade. Every other state Attorney General wanted the game classification scheme harmonised with other media, but he was a holdout (and had veto power).

Quote:

As an Australian that has also traveled overseas, I was first personally exposed to the realisation of the immensity of Australian censorship when I got to watch TV in other countries and was able to then compare movie to movie.

Umm.... no. This doesn't happen.

Australia has some of the most hands-off TV censorship in the world. It is almost totally self-regulated by the networks, and they get to choose what degree of restriction they want - governed by customer expectations rather than government intervention.

For example, SBS is by far one of the most hands-off networks anywhere in the world. Controversial movies that are censored on free-to-air networks in most countries are shown in full. Plus, there is a general variety that is rare to see on any commercial free-to-air network. I mean, look at the TV Guide:http://www.sbs.com.au/films/tv-guide

And, of course, Pay TV is a total free-for-all, with content such as the Adult Movie channel.

I've spent considerable time in Australia, Europe , China, the US and Japan. Australia and Germany, despite their reputation for censorship, honestly seem to have the least obvious censorship when it comes to broadcast TV. I've seen movies uncut on German and Australian TV networks that wouldn't even make it to air in an edited form in most countries.

Quote:

In one case, the move Die Hard when watched in the UK is entirely different to what you get in Australia.

Occasionally, movies are edited to be shown pre-watershed, but that has nothing to do with censorship. Editing an action movie to remove some grisly scenes or a few obscenities, so it can be shown in family viewing time, is just a commercial decision.

Networks have the watershed for a reason. Customers have an expectation that they can leave the TV on, and have non-offensive content prior to 8:30pm. Most TV stations cater for this expectation. That is a purely commercial decision, and if you have kids, you will probably appreciate it.

Australia has some of the most hands-off TV censorship in the world. It is almost totally self-regulated by the networks, and they get to choose what degree of restriction they want - governed by customer expectations rather than government intervention.

For example, SBS is by far one of the most hands-off networks anywhere in the world. Controversial movies that are censored on free-to-air networks in most countries are shown in full. Plus, there is a general variety that is rare to see on any commercial free-to-air network. I mean, look at the TV Guide:http://www.sbs.com.au/films/tv-guide

And, of course, Pay TV is a total free-for-all, with content such as the Adult Movie channel.

I've spent considerable time in Australia, Europe , China, the US and Japan. Australia and Germany, despite their reputation for censorship, honestly seem to have the least obvious censorship when it comes to broadcast TV. I've seen movies uncut on German and Australian TV networks that wouldn't even make it to air in an edited form in most countries.

Quote:

In one case, the move Die Hard when watched in the UK is entirely different to what you get in Australia.

Occasionally, movies are edited to be shown pre-watershed, but that has nothing to do with censorship. Editing an action movie to remove some grisly scenes or a few obscenities, so it can be shown in family viewing time, is just a commercial decision.

Networks have the watershed for a reason. Customers have an expectation that they can leave the TV on, and have non-offensive content prior to 8:30pm. Most TV stations cater for this expectation. That is a purely commercial decision, and if you have kids, you will probably appreciate it.

...what you said is the same as what I said. -.-

My point however was to illustrate the reasoning behind your last paragraph. But such decisions, whether commercial or not - the result is the same - censorship (which makes your second last paragraph incorrect).

Quote:

Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship.

My point however was to illustrate the reasoning behind your last paragraph. But such decisions, whether commercial or not - the result is the same - censorship (which makes your second last paragraph incorrect).

Firstly, please trim quotes. It's good netiquette.

Secondly, your original post made Australia out to be a nanny state, with a terrible TV censorship regime. That couldn't be further from the truth.

Having a TV show occasionally edited so it can be broadcast on a free-to-air network pre-watershed isn't anything out of the ordinary. It is a commercial decision by a TV network, and happens in every country in the world. Australia has one of the most liberal TV broadcasting policies I've experienced... it has never been anything like the previously restrictive game censorship regime.

Yeah, I got a bit lazy there i'll admit. I've trimmed them now though. However I like to keep the entirety of the post that i'm responding to so that other people reading it can keep things in context.

Marlor wrote:

Secondly, your original post made Australia out to be a nanny state, with a terrible TV censorship regime. That couldn't be further from the truth.

Fair enough - I've edited it for clarity. But it didn't make it any less of a surprise when exposed to 'freer' viewing in other countries when I had previously thought our society was more pragmatic then that.

Marlor wrote:

Having a TV show occasionally edited so it can be broadcast on a free-to-air network pre-watershed isn't anything out of the ordinary. It is a commercial decision by a TV network, and happens in every country in the world. Australia has one of the most liberal TV broadcasting policies I've experienced... it has never been anything like the previously restrictive game censorship regime.

Like I keep saying, I never said it was anything like the e.g. great firewall of China, so please don't make a straw-man argument. The fact remains that there is still too much self-censorship for my liking. And for ludicrously minor things no less - all in the name of avoiding complaints to the ombudsman. An argument made even more farcical when people can just change the channel. I guess the real parties I should be arguing with are the large networks...LOL - i've got a better chance of winning the lotto .

I always thought Aussies are drunken foul-mouthed yobs and their men are just as bad (old joke). Perhaps the Aussies I've encountered away from their home were revelling in the freedom from a repressive regime.

Joking aside could any Australian readers shed light on what caused such a restrictive set of censorship laws to come into place originally?

Idiotic politicians pandering to conservative sensitivities. It's not so much creating Victorian era prude laws, it's repealing them. Tasmania was famously backwards (cough) in repealing sodomy laws. We don't have the same level of free speech enjoyed by Americans (defamation laws can make public statements tricky).

Joking aside could any Australian readers shed light on what caused such a restrictive set of censorship laws to come into place originally?

It's illegal to produce any game/tv show/movie/etc in Australia without going through the process of getting it rated, and since games are for kids nobody ever thought to have an "18+" rating like there is for movies.

So basically it ended up being a loophole. Any game too violent/sexual for teenagers (aged 15+) would be "refused classification" and therefore cannot be sold legally.

The fact remains that there is still too much self-censorship for my liking. And for ludicrously minor things no less - all in the name of avoiding complaints to the ombudsman. An argument made even more farcical when people can just change the channel.

A little 'devil's advocate', maybe, but: perhaps being seen to demonstrate a little self-censorship over 'ludicrously minor things' is part of what has led to Australia having relatively little mandatory censorship (excluding video games until lately, of course). If the government is not regularly called upon to address media standards as an issue, and the majority of the citizenry feel that the industry has been able to, for the most part, responsibly and appropriately self-censor, it may feel less compelled to get involved. Minor sacrifices for bigger gains. Easier to get away with a few crimes if you have a cleaner record; easier to drive around with 2 tonnes of coke and a dead circus clown in the boot if you're not hooning like a jackoff.

First, let me say that it was about damn time too. I was vaguely aware of the restrictions in place down under because I remember reading stuff about it but for some reason it kept slipping my mind.

In fact I somewhat made abstraction of it because even though I've never set foot in Australia I've watched quite a few Australian movies and shows in my time and I would never have guessed that there was a form of self-censoring taking place. (I know it's old now but I have a soft spot for ABC's The Late Show and especially all the 'Shitscared' skits that I was able to put my grubby hands on.)

I guess, as in most countries, the harder-edged, more adult-oriented stuff can be found on cable television and the rest is for family content. Which of course was highly unfair to gamers because TV viewers have the choice to select what they view whereas adult gamers, barring finding a loophole in the system (as described earlier in the comments), had up until now to content themselves with watered-down games aimed at a teenaged audience.

Another country that comes to mind where they like to snip stuff out of games right and left is Germany, the country where the gore is green. I don't know if their legislation has evolved in the recent past but, if not, it would be high time to think about it too.

I know I have a filthy mind but I completely misread the title of the article at first. I read the word 'adult' as in 'adult entertainment industry' which considering everything would have been even more surprising.

This makes me want to get my hands on some of the censored Aussie games, for some possible lolz. Like the broadcast TV edit of Smokey and the Bandit, which exchanges all of Sheriff Buford T. Justice's sombitches with scumbums.

It's worth mentioning to people not living in the US that censorship is sorta uneven here. The FCC controls the content on TV and keeps especially tight reign over non-subscription terrestrial broadcast television. The FCC is usually lobbied by conservative groups and keeps the swearing down and the nudity pretty much non-existent on broadcast TV. That gives you wonderful lines like "Yippie-ki-yay [Mr Falcon]!"

Things you buy in store have little or no censorship beyond obscenity ordinances and the decisions of chain buyers. As such games, which are entirely industry-rated here kinda like movies, don't face any government censorship threat at all, and pretty much neither do movies or books. The primary exception would be anything that could be classified as porn which isn't supposed to be available to minors (or at all) in a lot of places. As an add-on to that any game rated AO will frequently not be stocked by retail store buyers.

Well, I think that just about every game that will be R18+ in Australia should really be M15+ because unlike in the US, this creates an actual legal, punitive restriction. Are you telling me that a 16 year old, who can legally consent to sex in Australia, is somehow too young for Ninja Gaiden 3?

It also seems inconsistent as my impression is that the ratings boards is much more forgiving of violence in movies.

I'm not sure what anyone from outside of Australia heard about the Australian Classification board, but the biggest issue I found with it is was the inconsistencies.

There have been a few games that were given the Refused Classification rating, to only be resubmitted without any changes and allowed. GTA 3, for example, was heavily censored and given an MA15+ rating for console, but was completely original for the PC version and given an MA15+ rating.

Either way, I'm looking forward to GTA V the most. I hope it has relentless and over the top adult themes.

Well, I think that just about every game that will be R18+ in Australia should really be M15+ because unlike in the US, this creates an actual legal, punitive restriction. Are you telling me that a 16 year old, who can legally consent to sex in Australia, is somehow too young for Ninja Gaiden 3?

It also seems inconsistent as my impression is that the ratings boards is much more forgiving of violence in movies.

I agree with the inconsistency between film and games, but the violence in Ninja Gaiden 3 is not equivalent to a 16 year old having sex (I hope!), and the effect those two activities have on a still-developing brain (and personality) is going to be different. I'm fine for different activities to be rated differently.

The one thing that always blew my mind about Australia is the rediculous system for video game ratings. For a country that comes off as a bunch of badasses, their ratings board smacks of nanny state. Now that they seem to have realized how rediculous this was, I hope my fellow gamers from Down Under can finally experience games as they were meant to be played.